Delhi District Court
State vs . Anjum Zamrud on 28 September, 2007
1
IN THE COURT OF MS RAVINDER KAUR ASJ,
NEW DELHI.
SC No.22/03
STATE VS. ANJUM ZAMRUD
D/o Sh Habibullah
Bhatt
R/o H No 830,
Mohallah Mehman
Rishi Bazar,
Anant Nag,
Jammu & Kashmir.
FIR No.09/03
PS Special Cell
U/s. 22(2) & 22(3) POTA
JUDGMENT.
1 The prosecution case is that there
2
were intelligence inputs with the IO ACP LN
Rao that one lady from J & K visits Pakistan
High Commission, Chankya Puri, New Delhi to
receive funds from there, with the intention to
use the same to promote terrorism and
accelerate terrorist activities in India. Sources
were deployed by him to develop the
information. On 6/2/03 at about 9:30 am , a
definite information was received that a lady
from Srinagar would come at about 11am at
Pakistan High Commission, Chankya Puri, New
Delhi and she would receive money from there
to further use it for the purposes of terrorism.
ACP LN Rao disclosed this information to
Inspt. Paras Nath and directed him to proceed
with a team of officers consisting of SI AK
3
Singh, SI CP Singh, WSI Dhara Mishra,
Ct.Mohan and HC Pawan Kumar and HC
Kurban Ali to keep a watch at Pakistan High
Commission as per the information and for
taking action. Inspt. Gurcharan Singh was also
directed telephonically to join the same by
reaching at Pakistan High Commission,
Chanakyapuri, New Delhi and also to take the
command of the team. At about 3:45pm on
receipt of a telephonic information from Inspt.
Gurcharan Singh , ACP LN Rao reached Niti
Marg, Near Nehru Park, New Delhi and found
that one lady Ms. Anjum Zamarud Habib was
apprehended. Inspt Gurcharan Singh
produced before him a bag containing
Rs.3,00,000/- and other articles duly seized
4
from the lady. He also produced a copy of
ruqqa sent by him through SI CP Singh for the
registration of the case at PS Special Cell (SB).
As per ruqqa Inspt. Gurcharan Singh reached
the place under information at about 12:15pm
and met the members of the raiding team
alongwith the informer. Inspt. Paras Nath told
him about the lady who had come there in a
taxi No. DL-1T-4398 at about 11am and had
gone inside the Pakistan High Commission,
holding only a lady purse in her hand. She was
pointed out on her arrival there, by the
informer as the lady, who would receive the
money from Pakistan High Commission for
terrorist outfits. After some time the lady, who
had gone inside the Pakistan High Commission
5
came out from there and stood outside the
gate. Her identity was again confirmed by the
informer to be the same lady. At this time the
said lady was also found having a black colour
leather bag on her shoulder apart from the
lady purse, which she was holding in her right
hand as well. Soon a taxi No. DL-1T-3635 came
there, she got in the same and the taxi moved
towards Yashwant Place, Chankyapuri which
was chased and intercepted at about 100 yards
before Chambri on the crossing of Niti Marg
and Satya Marg at about 1:15pm to the side of
the Nehru Park, Chankyapuri, New Delhi. The
taxi was surrounded with the help of members
of the raiding team. The lady sitting inside the
said taxi on rear seat on being asked disclosed
6
her name as Ms. Anjum Zamarud Habib d/o
Sh. Habibullah Bhatt r/o H. No. 830, Mohallah
Mehman, Rishi Bazar, Anant Nag, Jammu &
Kashmir. She was asked to get her bag and
purse checked, upon this she reluctantly
offered the search of the purse and the bag.
With the help of WSI Dhara Mishra and in the
presence of Inspt. Paras Nath and Sh
Narender Singh s/o Sh. Udham Singh, the
driver of the above said taxi the search was
conducted. The black colour leather bag on
checking was found containing 30 bundles of
Indian Currency Notes of Rs. 100/-
denomination ie Rs. 3 lacs. Slips were
affixed on 30 bundles of Indian Currency notes
which were got signed by Inspt. Paras Nath,
7
WSI Dhara Mishra, Sh. Narender Singh and
Inspt. Gurcharan Singh and by Ms. Anjum
Zamarud Habib as well. The bundles of notes
were kept in the same leather bag and were
seized vide seizure memo which as also got
signed in the aforesaid manner by the
witnesses. On checking the black colour
leather lady purse it was found containing 70
notes of Indian Currency of Rs. 100/-
denomination (total Rs. 7000/-), one personal
diary written in English and Urdu containing
addresses, telephone numbers etc. The diary
contained some full, half torn and loose sheets.
In addition to other written material in the
diary on the pages of dates 7,8,9 & 10 April,
the names of some terrorist outfits with some
8
figures were found written with date 6/2/2003.
One Air Ticket of Indian Airlines in the name of
Habib A Ms. from Srinagar to Delhi to
Srinagar bearing number 058:2204:4529511
(Srinagar - Delhi Sector used ) was also found
in the purse. The lady purse was also found
containing some negatives and photographs,
one election card in the name of Ms. Anjum
and medicines. On formal interrogation Ms.
Anjum Zamarud Habib revealed that the
money of Rs. 3,00,000/- so recovered from her
bag was given to her by Mr.Jalil Abbas Jilani,
the Deputy High Commissioner of Pakistan
High Commission, New Delhi. She had been
sent to Pakistan High Commission to meet Mr.
Jilani on the instructions of Abdul Gani Bhatt
9
the Chairman of All Party Hurriyat Conference
(APHC) to receive funds and carry the same to
Srinagar for further delivery to militant outfits.
About the names of some terrorist outfits and
the figures mentioned against them on the
pages of diary dated 7,8,9& 10 April she
revealed that as per the instructions received
by her from Pakistan High Commission, she
had written the amount to be delivered among
those militant outfits and the figures written
by her denote the amount in thousands. She
also revealed that Shabir Ahmed Dar of
Kashmir Awareness Bureau has also recently
received money from Mr. Jalil Abbas Jilani of
Pakistan High Commission for using it to fund
terrorist activities. In view of the above
10
revealed facts the diary and the Indian Airlines
Ticket were taken into possession through
separate seizure memos. This seizure memo
was also signed by Inspt. Paras Nath, WSI
Dhara Mishra, Sh. Narender Singh and Inspt.
Gurcharan Singh and by Ms. Anjum Zamrud
Habib as well. As a fund of Rs.3,00,000/-
recovered from Anjum Zamrud was received
by her from Pakistan High Commission with
intention to use to accelerate and promote
terrorism and it was suspected that she would
use the same for the purpose of terrorism and
to promote terrorist activities in India and
allegedly committed an offence U/s 22(2) of
the POTA. Hence ruqqa EX. PW 22/A was
sent through SI CP Singh for registration of
11
the case to Duty Officer at PS Special Cell
(SB), Lodhi Colony, New Delhi who was
requested to mark the investigation to ACP LN
Rao himself since the case attracted
provisions of Prevention of Terrorism Act.
2 During investigation, the articles
recovered from the possession of accused Ms.
Anjum Zamrud Habib (A-1)were taken over,
site plan was prepared, statement of
witnesses were recorded and she was arrested
in the present case. Her disclosure statement
Ex.PW 17/B was recorded. On her pointing
out, her co-accused Shabir Ahmed Dar (A-2)
was arrested from the office of Kashmir
Awareness Bureau at A-181, Shivalik, Malviya
Nagar, New Delhi who had also allegedly
12
received huge amount from Mr.Jalil Abbas
Jilani, Dy. High Commissioner, Pakistan High
Commission, New Delhi. During interrogation,
he also disclosed his association with Kashmir
Awareness Bureau of militancy in India and
collection of funds for such activities. He
stated that about 2-3days back he had received
Rs. 2,00,000/- from Mr. Jalil Abbas Jilani, Dy.
High Commissioner, Pakistan High
Commission, Ndew Delhi for funding the
terrorist outfits and for terrorist activities in
India, which he had kept in his House No. B-
84, Paryavaran Complex, Saidulajab, IGNOU
Road, Mehrauli, New Delhi (Ground floor).
Accordingly, his disclosure statement was
recorded. Further on the pointing out of the
13
accused Shabir Ahmed Dar some propaganda
material including 27 Video cassettes (big), 26
MP-8 cassettes, 23 Audio cassettes, some
pamphlets, books and posters, one eight sheets
copy of constitution of All Party Hurriyat
Conference and a five sheets list written in
Urdu about the details of prisoners lodged in
Central Jail, Tihar, Delhi, two hard discs of
computers installed in the office of KAB and 27
computer floppies were taken into possession.
Hard discs of the computer, floppies, Audio
cassettes, video cassettes and MP-8 cassettes
were sealed in separate pulandas with the seal
of ''LNR''. The list of prisoners seized through
seizure memo and the copy of the constitution
of APHR have been placed on file. One Lancer
14
Car No. DL-3C-P-9404, being used by the
accused Shabir Ahmed Dar for propagation of
terrorism was also seized from outside of his
office through seizure memo. On being taken
to his residence accused Shabir Ahmed Dar
produced Rs.2,00,000/- in four stacks of
hundred each in denomination of Rs. 500/-
from cup board of his bed room of his flat
situated at ground floor, which was also seized
through seizure memo. During the
investigation the list of prisoners lodged in
Central Jail, Tihar, Delhi written in Urdu
recovered from the office of KAB got
translated in Hindi and the same has also been
placed on the file. During tthe investigation
the verification of 69 prisoners as per the
15
recovered list was conducted from Central Jail,
Tihar , Delhi and out of the same 28 prisoners
were found lodged there. During the
investigation confessional statement of both
the accused were got recorded U/s 32 of POTA
by Sh. Ujjwal Mishra, DCP/Special Branch and
the same were got verified and confirmed by
Sh. VK Maheshwari, ACMM, Patiala House
Courts, New Delhi when the accused were
produced before him alongwith the
confessional statements. During the
investigation the specimen handwriting of the
accused Anjum Zamrud was obtained which
was sent to CFSL Lodhi Road alongwith the
questioned writing in her personal diary for
comparison and opinion of document expert
16
and the same was received vide No. CFSL-
2003/D-0110/2308 dtd. 17/4/03 wherein it has
been opined that ''Handwriting evidence
points to the writer of the specimen writings
marked S-1 to S-12 being the person
responsible for writing the questioned writing
red encircled and marked Q-1''. As per the
expert opinion incriminating questioned
writings have been positively linked with the
accused (A-1). During the investigation it has
been established that the names of the
terrorist outfits written on pages of the dates
7,8,9 & 10 April of the personal diary seized
from Ms. Anjum Zamrud are banned
organizations as per the schedule of the POTA
and that the names of the terrorist outfits
17
present in the personal diary of accused Ms.
Anjum Zamrud found written by her and the
names of Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed,
Hizb-ul-Mujahideen, Al-Umar exist in the list of
banned terrorist organizations given in the
schedule in the POTA itself.
3 The copies of computer floppies,
audio cassettes, video cassettes, MP-8
cassettes for the purpose of investigation were
made with the orders of the Hon'ble court in
the presence of Ahlmad of the court, which
clearly indicates inclination towards secession
of Kashmir under the garb of liberation of
Kashmir and struggle for freedom.
4 Both the hard discs of the
computers were sent to GEQD, Ramanthapur,
18
Hyderabad for analysis , the report and
printout of the same was received vide No.
CCH-2/2003/2104 dtd. 5/5/03. This printout
also contains provoking and instigatory
material whereby the facts have been distorted
to their advantage. It also contains a letter
written by Firdaus Asime, Bureau Chief, KAB
to the Chairman, APHC for making payment to
three advocates namely RM Tufail, Riyaz
Ahmed and Akhtar Hussain dealing with the
cases of various Kashmiri detenues. The letter
also speaks about the list of the persons as
enclosed, however the same are not found in
the printout of the hard disc itself but it it
evident that list of prisoners recovered from
KAB, A-181, Shivalik, Malviya Nagar, could be
19
the list, which has the mention in the above
said letter. It is also evident from the
reocvered list that the prisoners lodged in
Central Jail, Tihar not only hail from J & K, UP,
Delhi and Kolkatta but also from Pakistan and
Bangladesh and that what sort of assistance is
to be provided , which includes the assistance
of advocates, assistance in the jail and
assistance to their families. Investigation has
established that the prisoners lodged in the
Central jail, Tihar and who are in the list of the
APHC have been arrested under various
offences of the IPC, Explosive Substances Act,
TADA, Arms Act and Foreigners Act. The
above said expenses of the prisoners were met
by the APHC from the fund received from
20
Pakistan High Commission, New Delhi.
5 It was also revealed during the
investigation that the Lancer Car No. DL-3C-P-
9404 was registered in the name of Kashmir
Awareness Bureau, A-181, Shivalik, Malivya
Nagar, New Delhi. It has been found during
the investigation that fund of Rs.9.5 lacs for
the purchase of the said car was provided by
Sh . AG Lone (since dead), the then Chairman
of APHC. From this it is evident that APHC and
the persons linked with it have been holding
unaccountable fund with them and then to
spend the same on the terrorist outfits and for
their activities or on the activities affiliated to
them. During the investigation it has been
found that the said car was purchased in cash
21
from M/s Rajiv Motors Ltd., P-11, Connaught
Circus, New Delhi.
6 During investigation it revealed
that Prof. AG Bhatt (A-3) whose name figured
in the confessional statement of Ms Anjum
Zamarud and Shabir Ahmed Dar U/s 32 POTA
used to depute both these accused to receive
monetary fund from Mr. Jilal Abbas Jilani, Dy.
High Commissioner, Pakistan High
commission, New Delhi. It was established
during investigation that the fund received by
Ms.Anjum Zamarud Habib on 6/2/03 was also
collected on the instructions of Prof. AG Bhatt
and to be handed over to him on her way back
to Srinagar fromwhere the same was to be
distributed among the banned organisations of
22
terrorists through him, whereas the fund
received by Shabir Ahmed Dar, Bureau Chief ,
Delhi was to be utilized as per the instructions
of Prof.AG Bhatt. During the investigation Prof.
AG Bhatt was also interrogated in this regard
at Srinagar, though he did not confess his
direct involvement yet he could not explain the
source of unaccountable amount of Rs.
2,00,000/- recovered from his Bureau Chief
Shabir Ahmed Dar in Delhi and also could not
give any explanation of Rs.9,50,000/- which
was paid in cash for the purchase of the
Lancer Car No. DL-3C-P-9404.
7 During investigation, the
statement of witnesses were recorded and
Sec. 22(3) POTA was added.
23
8 On the basis of the recovery of
unaccountable money ie Rs.3 lacs and Rs.2
lacs by the accused Ms. Anjum Zamrud Habib
and Shabir Ahmed Dar respectively from
Pakistan High Commission, New Delhi to
further distribute the same among terrorist
outfits which are banned organizations as well
to use it to accelerate and promote terrorism
in India, other corroborative evidence based
on documents and other materials, and the
subsequent positive opinion of CFSL and
GEQD and their analysis and scrutiny, it
revealed that offence punishable U/s 22(2) and
22(3) POTA were committed by accused Anjum
Zamarud and Shabir Ahmed Dar.
9 During investigation, efforts were
24
made to collect the evidence against Prof. AG
Bhatt but no direct and sufficient evidence
could come on record against him, hence he
was not arrested. However, his name was
placed in Col. No.2 of the chargesheet.
10 On the basis of the confessional
statement U/s 32 POTA of accused Anjum
Zamrud and Shabir Ahmed Dar, the funds of
Rs. 3 lacs and Rs. 2 lacs respectively were
received by the accused from Mr.Jalil Abbas
Jilani, the then Dy. High Commissioner ,
Pakistan High Commission, New Delhi. Vide
letter No. D.III/551/1/2003 dtd. 20/5/03
received from Ministry of External Affairs,
Govt. of India, it was informed that Mr.Jalil
Abbas Jilani was posted as Charge d' Affairs /
25
Acting High Commissioner, Pakistan High
Commission, New Delhi on the relevant date
i.e 6/2/03. Accused Anjum also revealed that
the share of the amount of Rs. 3 lakhs to be
distributed among the terrorist outfits written
by her in her personal diary was recorded as
per the directions of Mr. Jalil Abbas Jilani.
11 Since Mr.Jalil Abbas Jilani enjoys
diplomatic privileges and immunities under the
Diplomatic Relations (Vienna Convention) Act
1972, he could be prosecuted, as such he was
not sent for trial and his name was placed in
Col. No. 2 of the chargesheet.
12 The requisite sanction for
prosecution of the accused persons U/s 50 of
the POTA was obtained from the GNCT Delhi
26
vide No. F.No. 11/23/2003/HP-II/2573 dtd.
20.5.03and has been placed on file.
13 After completion of the investigation the charge sheet was filed to Court against both the accused namely Anjum Zamrud Habib and Shabir Ahmed.
However, lateron the proceedings were dropped against accused Shabir Ahmed by my Ld Predecessor on the application of the prosecution U/s 321 Cr. PC. In these circumstances, though the prosecution in support of its case has examined 24 witnesses. However, the relevant witnesses qua accused Anjum Zamrud are PW 4 ASI Diler Singh, PW 5 Prithi Preetik Sarkar, PW7 Dr MA Ali, PW 8 SI Sri Kishan, PW 9 27 Salig Ram PW 10 Sh.M Krishna , PW 11 Narinder Singh, PW 12 ASI Dara Mishra, PW 17 ACP Sh LN Rao, PW 20 Inspt. Paras Nath, PW 21 Sh Ujjwal Mishra, the (then) DCP, PW 22 Sh Gurcharan Singh, Retired ACP and PW 24 SI CP Singh.
14 The statement of the accused was recorded U/s 313 Cr.PC whereby she denied the incriminating evidence against her and claimed that she has been falsely implicated and she had come to Delhi as she had plan to attend International Conference in Bangkok concerning Women empowerment as she was working for women empowerment in an area through a voluntary organisation and needed to go to Pakistan to co-ordinate with Pakistani 28 Women Right Activities and had come to Delhi with Rs.3,50,000/- to buy computer for her center and ticket for Pakistan and Bangkok. Further she came to Pakistan High commission to collect the visa form and then she left. It is further stated that she was staying with Kashmir Awareness Bureau run by Hurriyat Conference and when she reached the office of Hurriyat Conference at Malivya Nagar she was taken away in the same taxi in which she was travelling alongwith the officers of Hurriyat Conference and was told to be a witness against Hurriyat Conference leader and Pakistan High Commission Officials and on her refusal she was falsely implicated in the present case.
2915 Regarding the diary ExPW22/B recovered from her possession it is stated that when the said diary was taken from her possession at the Lodhi Colony office nothing was mentioned on the pages dated 7th ,8th ,9th and 10th April. She further stated that during police custody she was tortured and her clothes were removed by WSI Dhara Mishra with a threat that she would be paraded naked and under that threat she was made to write some names in the diary at the dictation of IO and it was done on the third day of her police remand.
16 In Ans to question that on 6.2.03 she had approached PW 9 Salig Ram and hired taxi No DL lT 4398 for going to Pakistan 30 Embassy Chankyapuri and was dropped there at 11am, she admitted that she had gone to Pakistan Embassy. However, it is claimed that she had collected visa form and had left the Pakistan High Commission to come again next day with requisite documents for visa. She did not deny her travel by taxi No DL lT 4398 to Pakistan High Commission.
17 In answer to Question No 7 recorded U/s 313 Cr PC she denied that she was found in possession of 30 bundles of Indian Currency notes in the denomination of Rs.100/- and each bundle was containing 100 currency notes.
18 Regarding her confessional statement recorded by PW 21 Sh Ujjwal 31 Mishra the (then) DCP, she stated that she never expressed her desire to make confession. She further stated that she told IO that she could not read or write Hindi and she only knew Urdu and English language and had told IO that all the proceedings be conducted in the language known to her so that she could understand the proceedings. She denied having made any confessional statement before DCP Sh Ujjwal Mishra.
19 Regarding the confirmation proceedings conducted by Sh V.K. Maheshwari, the ( then) ACMM, Patiala House Courts for confirmation of her confession Ex PW21/B, it is stated that she was produced before the Court but no proceedings were 32 conducted during police custody . It is stated that she was told by the police not to complain against them before the Court and the Court did not ask her if she could read or write Hindi language. She stated that some written work was done and her signatures were obtained. She stated that she could not understand the proceedings conducted by ACMM New Delhi as she was not allowed to have legal consultation.
20 Regarding the pages dated 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th April Ex.PW 7/A as contained in the diary Ex.PW22/B containing the names of the terrorist outfit with some figure written against them, she stated that at the time when the diary was seized from her 33 possession nothing was written on the pages dated 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th April.
21 The accused has not led any evidence in her defence.
22 The defence counsel has filed written arguments on record. Copy of the same were given to Spl.PP for State. 23 I have heard arguments and have gone through the material on record carefully. 24 As per the written submissions of the defence counsel, it is alleged that there is no material on record to link the money which was allegedly recovered from accused with the Pakistan High Commission. It is submitted that the notes recovered from the accused were new and from the serial number 34 it could be verified by the investigating agency from Reserve Bank of India as to whom these currency notes were issued and in the absence of such verification no link between recovery of the amount from the possession of the accused and the Pakistan High Commission has been proved on record. It is claimed that except the oral evidence of police officials there is no other evidence to establish the link between the money allegedly recovered and the Pakistan High Commission. It is submitted that PW 17 ACP LN Rao, the IO of the case to cover up his inaction denied during cross examination stated that the currency notes were not new. 25 It is further submitted that the 35 prosecution is trying to establish the link of the accused with the terrorist organisation through recovery of diary ExPW22/B allegedly containing the names of the terrorist organisation. it is submitted that the rukka which was the first document prepared by the police after search of the accused does not contain the name of any terrorist organization allegedly mentioned on pages dated 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th April which only establishes that these pages were blank when diary was seized and a false rukka was prepared lateron by PW 22 Retired Inspt. Gurcharan Singh to implicate the accused in a false case and that earlier another rukka was prepared by PW 17 ACP LN Rao but was destroyed. To that effect the 36 defence counsel has drawn my attention towards the cross examination of PW 20 Inspt. Paras Nath ,whereby he stated that rukka was prepared by ACP LN Rao but when he was shown the rukka marked DX lateron exhibited as Ex. PW 22/A, he state that it was in the handwriting of Inspt Gurcharan Singh. 26 Further it is argued that the diary ExPW22/B was not sealed intentionally as the pages dtd 7th, 8th , 9th and 10th April were blank when received and the names of militant organization were got added in the diary at later stage from the accused by torturing her and threatening that she would be paraded naked if she did not do as told by the police. It is further submitted that signatures of none 37 of the witnesses were obtained on the diary and its pages , whereas the signatures of the witnesses were obtained on the bank currency notes recovered from the possession of the accused which leads to inference that the diary was not containing the incriminating material as alleged by the prosecution.
27 Regarding the confession of the accused recorded U/s 32 Sub Sec 2 POTA, it is submitted that the confession was recorded in clear violation of the POTA and High Court rules. It is submitted that it was not explained to the accused in writing by DCP Sh Ujjwal Mishra that she was not bound to make any confession and that if she does so it may be used against her. It is further submitted that 38 the provisions of Order 32(3) POTA were also not complied with as it was recorded in Hindi language which was not known to the accused. It is submitted that the accused is MA, M.Ed. and LLB and only knows Urdu and English but deliberately confession was recorded in Hindi language.
28 The defence counsel has further alleged that the confession of the accused is required to be confirmed under Section 32(4) POTA but in the present case the such confirmation by the Court of ACMM is violative of such provisions as under POTA the confirmation could be done only by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and not by the ACMM as done in the present case. It is stated that 39 the accused had retracted her confession vide her letter dtd. 19.2.03 that it was under
threat and fear as she was threatened that they will take her nude pictures and would publish them every where.
29 The defence counsel has quoted certain authorities in his written submissions that a retracted confession cannot be used as corroborative evidence against accused and it is a weak piece of evidence. That it cannot be acted upon unless it is voluntarily and is corroborated by the other evidence . 30 It is further alleged that provisions of Sec. 52 POTA have not been complied with in the present case as she was not informed of her right to consult a legal 40 practitioner as soon as she was brought to the PS, consequent upon her arrest. It is submitted that Shri VK Maheshwari the (then) ACMM admitted in his cross examination that he had not provided any legal help to the accused and that PW 17 ACP LN Rao in his cross examination stated that he had not informed in writing to the accused of her right to consult a legal practitioner before making the confession or in detention. Further, the accused was kept in police custody even after she made the alleged confession which is gross violation of the rules of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi .
31 Regarding PW11 Narender Singh the taxi driver from whose taxi the accused 41 was arrested and recovery was affected. It is claimed that he is a tutored witness. 32 It is further alleged that no public witness was joined intentionally by the IO despite their availability. Further that as per the confession of accused the money was delivered to all party Hurriat Conference but it is not a terrorist organisation U/s 18(a) and 18(b) POTA and is also not included in the schedule of terrorist organization published U/s 18 POTA, as such even if the alleged money recovered from the possession of accused was for APHC, it would not constitute an offence under Sec. 22(2) , 22(3) POTA . 33 It is further submitted that raid and seizure in the present case is in violation 42 of Sec. 7 POTA as the investigation could not be carried out by an officer below the rank of Supdt. of Police which is equivalent to the rank of DCP in Delhi but in the present case the investigation was carried out by ACP LN Rao who had no authority to conduct the investigation. Further, no approval of Director General of Police or the designated authority under POTA to seize the proceeds of terrorism was sought. It is submitted that accused Anjum Zamrud deserves acquittal.
34 On the other hand, the Spl PP for State has argued that recovery of Rs 3 lacs from the possession of accused is not disputed in clear terms as she has claimed in her statement U/s.313 Cr.PC that she was in 43 possession of Rs. 3,50,000/- on the relevant day It is further submitted that the seizure of the diary ExPW22/B is also not disputed by the accused, though it is claimed that it was not containing any writing on the pages dtd. 7Th, 8th, 9th and 10th April . It is submitted that the prosecution has duly proved on record that these writings are in the handwriting of the accused and this fact is also admitted by her. It is submitted that the accused has levelled false allegations against the investigating agency that she was made to write the name of the terrorist organisations on these pages forcibly and under threat that she would be paraded naked. However, she has failed to bring any material on record regarding these allegations 44 nor she lodged any protest before the court at the earliest opportunity available to her. 35 The Addl PP for State has submitted that all the witnesses to the seizure of diary ExPW22/B spoke about the contents and its contents are also mentioned in the seizure memo Ex.PW 11/C. It is submitted that in the rukka though the names of the terrorist organisations are not mentioned, however it is categorically mentioned that in the diary ExPW22/B. The Addl PP for State has drawn my attention towards the order dtd. 7.2.03 passed by my Ld Predecessor while disposing of the application of the investigating officer for police custody remand wherein it is observed that accused Anjum 45 admitted before the Court that she had received a sum of Rs. 3 lacs given to her by Pakistan Embassy to Professor Bhatt Chairman of Hurriyat Conference. It is submitted that as such it is admitted by her that she had received a sum of Rs. 3 lacs from Pakistan Embassy and in view of the entries in her diary the said amount was to be delivered to the terrorist organization namely JKLF,-Al- Umar, Jaish-e-Mohd, LeT, Hizb Ul Mujahideen etc. Further the recovery of Rs.3 lacs and the contents of diary ExPW22/B finds corroboration from her confessional statement U/s 32 POTA Ex.PW21/B, wherein she confessed that the aforesaid amount was to be delivered to the terrorist organisations 46 (Zehadi organisations) through APHC and that she also confessed that she had written in her diary to whom the said amount was to be distributed. It is further submitted that the confession made by the accused was confirmed by Sh VK Maheshwari the (then) ACMM Patiala House Courts, New Delhi and there also she did not lodge any protest that she was not aware of Hindi language or that she was forced to write the names of the terrorist organization in her diary ExPW22/B or was forced to make confession U/s 32 POTA. It is submitted that the police had no enmity with the accused to falsely implicate her. 36 Regarding rukka it is submitted that it is categorically stated by all the 47 witnesses that it was prepared by ACP LN Rao.
37 Regarding the allegations by the defence counsel that the rukka prepared by ACP LN Rao was destroyed and it was substituted by another rukka prepared by Inspt Gurcharan Singh, it is submitted that the defence counsel has based the aforesaid] allegation in view of the statement of PW 20 Parasnath , wherein he stated in his chief examination that the rukka was prepared by ACP LN Rao on the statement of Inspt Gurcharan Singh . It is submitted that the incident had taken place on 6.2.03 whereas the statement of this witness was recorded on 12.1.07 i e approximately about 4 years after 48 the incident and it is likely that he forgot as to who prepared rukka It is submitted that this witness admitted in his cross examination that the rukka Mark DX now exhibited as Ex.pW22/A was in the handwriting of Gurcharan Singh and he also denied that rukka prepared by ACP LN Rao was destroyed. It is submitted that accused is liable to be convicted U/s 22(2) & 22(3) POTA. 38 In the light of the arguments of both the parties the evidence of the prosecution witnesses is to be appreciated as to whether it inspires any credence and whether the prosecution has succeeded in proving its case against the accused. 39 A person who raises fund for 49 terrorist organization commits an offence punishable U/s 22POTA. The accused has been charged U/s 22(2) & 22(3) POTA. 40 To attract the provisions of Section 22(2) POTA the onus was on the prosecution to prove that the accused had received money or any other property and intended that it should be used or had reasonable cause to suspect that it may be used for the offence of terrorism. 41 Similarly to attract the provisions of Section 22(3) POTA the onus was also on the prosecution to prove that the S provided money or any other property knowingly or having reasonable cause to suspect that the said money or property would be or may be 50 used used for the purposes of terrorism. 42 The prosecution case is that ACP LN Rao PW 17 had received a secret information that a lady will visit Pakistan High Commission to get some money to be used for funding terrorist organisation in India and to verify this information he deputed PW 20 Inspt. Paras Nath who had formed a raiding party and a laid a trap near Pakistan High Commission on Niti Marg. Inspt Gurcharan Singh also joined him there and lateron raiding party intercepted the accused Anjum Zamrud while travelling in taxi No. DL lT 3635 after collecting money from Pakistan High Commission. The relevant witnesses of the prosecution to the secret information and 51 apprehension of the accused are PW 17 ACP LN Rao, PW11 Narinder Singh, the taxi driver, an independent witness, PW 12 ASI Dhara Mishra, PW 20 Inspt Paras Nath,PW22 Inspt Gurcharan Singh,PW 24 SI CP Singh. 43 PW 17 LN Rao, ACP Shahdara testified that on 6.2.03 he was posted as ACP Spl Cell Lodhi Colony and had received the investigation of the present case after registration of the case. He testified that before he joined the investigation of the present case he had secret information that a lady would visit Pakistan High Commission on 6.2.03 to get some money from the Pakistan High Commission to be used for funding terrorist organization in India. He deputed 52 Inspt Paras Nath to verify the information who alongwith other staff namely SI Dhara Mishra, SI AK Singh, SI CP Singh and others formed a raiding party. After sometimes he directed Gurcharan Singh to reach Pakistan High Commission to help the police team in Chankyapuri area near Pak High Commission where a trap was laid on Niti Marg opposite Nehru Marg. At about 3.45 pm he was informed by Inspt Gurcharan Singh that they had intercepted one lady named Anjum Zamrud so he also reached the spot where rukka was already prepared by Inspt Gurcharan Singh for registration of the case and Inspt Gurcharan Singh produced a sealed parcel containing currency notes of Rs. 3 lacs 53 in a bag and one pocket diary wherein some names and addresses were mentioned. He further testified that particularly in that diary on the pages dtd. 7th to 10th April 1997 the names of terrorist outfits and some figures in front of their name were mentioned. He took up the investigation of this case and interrogated the accused . Site plan Ex PW 17/A was prepared by him. He recorded the disclosure statement of accused as Ex PW 17/E and formally arrested her. Her personal search was conducted vide memo Ex PW 17/C. He also prepared her inspection memo as Ex PW 17/D, on the basis of physical inspection carried out by WSI Dhara Mishra . During investigation she informed the police that she 54 had stayed in the office of Kashmir awareness Bureau A 181 Shivalik Malviya Nagar and this fact was confirmed by her co accused ( Proceedings were dropped against the co accused by the prosecution U/s 321 Cr PC) . He further testified that from her personal search her passport, I card, tops, ring, and Rs 7000/-were recovered which were seized vide seizure memo Ex PW 17/E. He further testified that her confessional statement U/s 32 POTA was recorded by the ( then ) DCP Sh Ujjwal Mishra . It is stated that he produced her confessional statement in sealed cover before Sh VK Maheshwari the then ACMM for confirmation and also moved an application to that effect which is Ex PW 13/A. Accused was 55 produced before that court for confirmation of the proceedings and the confessional statement was confirmed by the aforesaid court. It is testified that during the course of investigation he also obtained specimen handwriting of Anjum Zamrud EX PW 7/D 1 to D 11. further, at her instance recovery of incriminating material i e list of inmates lodged in jail in Delhi besides floppy were recovered from the office and residence of her co accused Shabir Ahmed Dar. He further stated that the documents Ex .PW 7/B & C i e the pages of the diary recovered from the possession alongwith her specimen handwriting Ex PW7/ D1 to D 11 were sent to handwriting expert for comparison and the 56 report of the handwriting expert to that effect is Ex PW 7/E. He also deposed that one air ticket Ex.PW 11/B was recovered from accused ( though it is wrongly typed in the evidence as Ex PW 11/A). He further testified that he had recorded the statements of the witnesses and also obtained sanction from the competent authority. This witness also testified that he had an application Ex PW 17/F on the basis of which Joint CP Spl. Cell passed written orders on the note sheet Ex PW 21/D authorising Sh Ujjwal Mishra the then DCP Spl Branch to record statement of accused U/s 32 POTA. Thereafter he moved an application Ex PW 21/C before the concerned DCP Spl Branch for obtaining the copies of the proceedings and 57 the statements of the accused persons. 44 This witness was cross examined by length by the defence counsel regarding the receipt of secret information, about arrival of accused in Delhi for collecting money from Pakistan High Commission for funding terrorists. He was also cross examined regarding his authority to investigate the matter in POTA, regarding the location from where the accused was apprehended and joining of the public witnesses therefrom. The witness was also cross examined regarding the case property , particularly the diary containing pages Ex. PW 7/A whereon the names of the terrorist organisation and a figure against each name finds mention. The 58 witness was also cross examined as to why the signatures of the witnesses present at the spot were not obtained on the relevant pages of diary Ex.PW22/B and why it was not sealed. The witness categorically stated that the diary was not sealed as it was required for further investigation and interrogation. The witness was also cross examined regarding the language with which the accused was conversant whether it was Hindi, English or Urdu and he stated that he had personally asked the accused whether she knew reading and writing Hindi and she told him that she knew to write and read Hindi, English and Urdu. He denied the suggestion that she did not know to write or read Hindi but she only 59 knew Urdu or English language. The witness was also cross examined regarding her passport recovered from her possession that it was accompanied with visa application form but this fact was denied by him that her passport was accompanying visa form. He was further cross examined to the effect that the accused was never willing to sign confessional statement and for this reason WASI Dhara Mishra was instructed to parade accused naked in case she refused to sign the confessional statement, however these suggestions are denied by the witness. The witness was further cross examined at length regarding the confessional statement recorded by Sh. Ujjwal Mishra DCP Spl Cell but nothing 60 material could be extracted. He was further cross examined to the effect that he did not inform the accused of her right to consult a legal adviser, to that he stated that he verbally told the accused that she had a right to legal consultation and he also mentioned this fact in the case diary. He further testified that the accused told him that she would argue her case personally.
45 PW 20 Inspt Para Nath from Spl Cell testified that on 6.2.03 he was posted with Spl Cell Lodhi Colony. They had information earlier that female comes from Srinagar and collects money from Pakistan Embassy and used to deposit with various outfits. On that day ACP LN Rao received 61 specific information that a female would be reaching Pakistan High Commission around 11 am for collecting money and thereafter would go back to Srinagar. This information was passed on to him by the ACP and he was directed to take necessary action. At this, he formed a raiding party consisting of himself, SI AK Singh, SI CP Singh, WSI Dhara Mishra,HC Qurban Ali, HC Pawan Kumar and Ct. Mohan alongwith commandos. Thereafter, he alongwith the raiding party and the informer left the office of Spl Cell for Pakistan High Commission at 10.10 am in his own Maruti Van. On reaching there they took their respective positions in front of the gate of Embassy. 2- 4 passersby were asked to join 62 the raiding party but none joined. It is testified that around 11 am Maurti van taxi of black and yellow colour bearing No DL lT 4398 reached the gate of Embassy and dropped the accused present in Court at the gate who was holding a black colour small purse in her hand and went inside. At about 12.15 noon Inspt Gurcharan Singh also reached who was briefed by this witness and raiding party was divided into two parts, one was headed by Inspt Gurcharan Singh and the other by him. At about 1.10 pm the accused came out of the Embassy holding a big bag of black leather on her right shoulder and small purse was still in her hand. She waited for 2-4 minutes at the gate and a taxi bearing No DL lT 3635 Maruti Van of 63 black and yellow colour came there and she sat in the same. The taxi thereafter reached Niti Marg which was followed by the witness in his own Maruti van alongwith SI AK Singh SI Pawan Kumar HC Qurban Ali, Ct Mohan and a commando and by inspt Gurcharan Singh alongwith SI CP Singh WSI Dhara Mishra and two commandos in the official Gypsy. The taxi in which the accused was travelling was intercepted near electric pole No 103, near Nehru Park from where Niti Marg and Satya Marg Chambry were at a distance of 100 yards by the vehicle of Inspt Gurcharan Singh. Whereas, this witness stopped his vehicle behind the taxi. Thereafter Inspt Gurcharan Singh showed his I card to the accused and 64 while disclosing his identity she was told that he wanted to search her. At this, the accused retaliated but lateron agreed. Thereafter WSI Dhara Mishra searched the accused inside the taxi while the driver of the taxi and the police officials were outside the taxi. From the small purse which the accused was carrying Rs 7000/- cash, Election photo I card, one small diary, one sliver ring and a pair of gold tops were recovered. Thereafter, the big black colour leather which was in possession of accused was searched by WSI Dhara Mishra from which Rs. 3 lacs in denomination of Rs. 100/- in 30 bundles were recovered. He testified that on each of the bundle a slip was affixed on which the accused, the driver of the 65 taxi, Inspt Gurcharan Singh and the witness had put their signatures . It is further testified that at about 3.45 pm ACP LN Rao reached the spot who was informed about the incident and investigation was taken over by him . He deposed about the seizure of all the articles from her possession at the spot. He further stated that the rukka was prepared by ACP LN Rao on the statement of Inspt Gurcharan Singh and was sent through SI CP Singh for registration of the case. He also deposed about recording of the disclosure statement of accused as Ex PW 17/B and thereafter the arrest of accused Shabir Ahmed Dar at the instance of accused Anjum Zamrud from Shivalik Enclave Malviya Nagar the office of 66 Kashmir Awareness Bureau from where propaganda material consisting of cassettes, CDs, books of some pamphlets were recovered. The witness identified the articles recovered from accused Anjum Zamrud in Court.
46 This witness was subjected to lengthly cross examination by the defence counsel. He was cross examined as to whether he had obtained any permission from the Director General of Police & Designated Authority under POTA that proceeds of terrorism were to be seized, the witness admitted that no such permission was obtained nor he was authorised by any Superior Officer for seizing the proceeds of terrorism. 67 The witness was cross examined with regard to the surroundings of the Pakistan High Commission, where the raiding party had taken its position and he answered all the questions in rational manner giving the details of the surroundings of Pakistan High Commission and where the same is situated. During cross examination also this witness categorically stated that secret informer was with them at the time when accused Anjum Zamrud reached Pakistan High Commission, though no memo of identification of the accused at the instance of secret informer was prepared. The witness was also cross examined as to why the auto drivers or the public persons present near the Pakistan 68 High Commission were not joined in the raiding party, he stated that did ask some public persons to join the raiding party but they refused and did not disclose their names and addresses. The witness was further cross examined regarding the description of the lady who went inside the Pakistan High Commission given to Inspt.Gurcharan Singh. The question put to the witness had no relevance, particularly, when it is not only Inspt Gurcharan Singh who had apprehended the accused but the prosecution case is that the accused was apprehended by the entire police team which consisted of Inspt Gurcharan Singh as well, as such there was no problem of the identification of the lady, 69 who had went inside the Pakistan High Commission and the lady who came out with black leather bag on her shoulder containing Rs. 3 lacs. The witness admitted that no government officials were joined in the raiding party. He was further cross examined regarding the place of the apprehension of the accused which was correctly answered by the witness that the taxi in which the accused was travelling was stopped near Niti Marg and Satya Marg Chembry. The witness admitted that Yashwant Palace was near the spot and so were government offices but none was summoned from there to join the raiding party. During cross examination the witness categorically stated that PW 11 Narinder 70 Singh, the taxi driver, was also present at the time of search of the bag of the accused. So far rukka is concerned, he stated that it was prepared by ACP LN Rao, when he reached the spot on the basis of the entire input given by Inspt Gurcharan Singh. During his further cross examination he stated that rukka was prepared in his presence but he could not remember whether it was written by ACPLN Rao or anybody else. He again stated that it was written by ACP LN Rao but when it was shown to him he admitted that it was not in the handwriting of ACP LN Rao but was in the handwriting of Inspt Gurcharan Singh. It appears that this witness due to some confusion or may be lapse of time was not in a 71 position to state as to who prepared the rukka, as the incident is dated 06.02.2003, whereas his said statement was recorded on 12.1.2007 after about four years of the incident.
47 PW 12 W ASI Dhara Mishra testified on the lines of PW 20 Inspt Parasnath. She testified that when the taxi in which the accused was traveling was stopped, the accused was informed that they were from police and had to check her. The accused offered herself for checking. Her black leather bag on checking was found containing 30 packs of Rs.100/- currency note. She further deposed about diary in the black leather bag containing some addresses written 72 in English and some written in Urdu which was also containing the names of the organisations and against the name of the organisation a figure was mentioned. She further testified that one Indian airlines ticket from Srinagar to Delhi was also recovered. Seizure memos of articles were prepared on which the signatures of the witnesses and the accused were obtained. Further that Inspt Paras Nath, Inspt Gurcharan Singh interrogated the accused. While they were still at the spot ACP LN Rao also reached there and then rukka was prepared, which was sent through SI C P Singh for registration of the case. She further deposed that accused Anjum Zamrud had disclosed the name of one 73 Shabir Ahmed Dar as another person, who was receiving money from Pakistan High Commission and that he was having office at Malviya Nagar.( Proceedings against accused Shabir Ahmed Dar were dropped U/s 321 Cr.P C. As such the testimony of the aforesaid witness relating to the investigation against Shabir Ahmed Dar is irrelevant and is not discussed hereby). She identified diary recovered from the possession of accused as Ex.PW 22/B, the leather bag Ex.P4, small leather purse Ex.P5, air ticket Ex.PW 11/B, the currency notes as Ex.PW 6/1to 30. 48 This witness was also subjected to lengthy cross examination by the defence counsel regarding the secret information 74 received by Inspt Paras Nath, vehicle in which the raiding party had reached the spot, the sitting arrangements of the police officials in the car, the surroundings of the Pakistan High Commission, joining of CRP Force present near the Pakistan High Commission in the raiding party, the surroundings of the vicinity where the taxi in which the accused was traveling was intercepted and the joining of the public witnesses. She was also cross examined with regard to the personal search and body inspection of the accused conducted by the accused. To which she stated that by body inspection she meant that personal search of accused was taken from outside her clothes. She denied the suggestion that 75 accused Anjum Zamrud was tortured and humiliated and was not allowed to use bathroom. The witness admitted that she had done the body inspection of accused Anjum Zamrud after taking her clothes off, however she denied that her clothes were taken off repeatedly and she was threatened to be paraded naked or she should sign the documents at the instance of the Sr. Officers. The witness categorically stated that she had searched the accused only to know if there was any suspicious article concealed by her on her body.
49 PW 22 Sh. Gurcharan Singh, the then Inspt Spl Cell deposed on the lines of PW 17 ACP LN Rao and PW 20 Inspt Paras Nath 76 and PW 12 WASI Dhara Mishra on all the material particulars. It is this witness who has intercepted the taxi in which the accused was travelling from Pakistan High Commission. He deposed that on search of the leather bag of the accused it was found containing 30 bundles of currency notes of Rs 100 /- denomination and on search of the lady purse in her possession 70 notes of Rs. 100/- denomination of Indian currency, a personal diary executive ) of the year 1997 containing certain full sheets, some half torn sheets and some loose sheets were found . It is stated that some of the pages of the said diary was written in English and Urdu containing some addresses , telephone numbers, names etc. 77 Further, that the pages in the diary dtd. 7th to 10th April were found written with the date of 6.2.2003, the names of certain militant outfits and some numerical figures against each of them was written there. She was also found in possession of one election card in her name and air ticket of Indian airlines from Srinagar to Delhi and Delhi to Srinagar which were only found used from Srinagar to Delhi. Some negatives and photographs and some medicines were also found in the purse. He deposed about the seizure of all these articles regarding the 30 bundles of currency notes. He stated that slips were affixed on the bundles of currency notes, on which the signature of Inspt Paras Nath and WASI Dhara 78 Mishra, taxi driver Narender Singh and the accused were obtained and he had also signed the slips .He further stated that the slips were also pasted on the bag,on which also the signature of the witnesses and the accused were obtained. He proved the seizure memos Ex PW 11/A& C vide which 30 bundles of currency notes, the personal diary and the air ticket were seized. He testified that he prepared rukka Ex PW 22/A which was sent through SI CP Singh for registration of the case. It is further testified that ACP LN Rao had reached the spot as further investigation was marked to him since in the rukka it was mentioned that the matter was under POTA. Regarding the further investigation carried by 79 ACP LN Rao it is stated that he recorded his statement and prepared site plan at his instance. This witness correctly identified before the Court the case property recovered from the possession of accused .
50 This witness was also subjected to lengthy cross examination regarding the surroundings of Pakistan High Commission, use of her private Gypsy for official purposes,the manner of interception of taxi in which accused was travelling, the offices near the place of apprehension of accused, preparation of recovery memo at the spot. The witness denied the suggestion that sum of Rs.3 lacs recovered from the bag of accused was brought by her from Srinagar or that she had 80 come to Delhi to apply for visa. The witness was also questioned as to why the contents of pages dtd. 7th to 10 April in the diary Ex PW 22/B were not incorporated in the rukka and the witness clarified that the contents of these pages were mentioned in the seizure memo. He denied the suggestion that at the time he prepared rukka pages dtd.7th to 10th Ex PW 7/A were blank and for this reason their contents were not mentioned in the rukka. He also explained that he had not obtained the signatures of any of the witnesses on these pages as the witness had signed the seizure memo containing the contents of the relevant pages. He also denied the suggestion that ACP LN Rao had also prepared rukka but 81 since no case was made out against accused,the said rukka was destroyed and this witness prepared another rukka .He also denied that any passport and visa form were recovered from the possession of the accused but were destroyed.
51 PW 24 SI SI CP Singh who was also member of the raiding party under Inspt Paras Nath deposed on the lines of witnesses, referred above. Regarding rukka Ex PW 22/A it is stated by him that it was prepared by Inspt Gurcharan which was handed over to him and he took the same to Spl. Cell Lodhi Colony and got the FIR No 9/03 Ex PW 4/A was registered. He identified the accused Anjum Zamrud correctly. He proved the 82 seizure memo of the black colour bag and Rs 3 Lacs from the possession of accused as Ex PW 11/A and the seizure memo of the air ticket and the diary as Ex PW 11/C. Regarding the remaining articles recovered from the possession of accused, he stated that these were seized vide seizure memo Ex PW 17/E. He identified the diary recovered from the possession of accused as Ex PW 22/B and the air ticket Ex PW 11/B( wrongly typed as Ex PW 11/A).
52 The witness denied the suggestion of defence counsel that one rukka was prepared ACP LN Rao and it was destroyed and another rukka was prepared to falsely implicate the accused. He categorically 83 stated that rukka was prepared by Inspt Gurcharan Singh which he had taken to PS for registration of case.
53 This witness was also subjected to lengthly cross examination by the defence counsel regarding the surroundings of the spot from where the accused was apprehended as well as the Pakistan High Commission and joining of the public witnesses,government officials therefrom. Admittedly, no public witness was joined in the raiding party from near the Pakistan High Commission or from near the place where accused was apprehended but merely for this reason the testimony of official witnesses cannot be thrown away, particularly, when PW 11 84 Narinder Singh, an independent witness was available at spot at the time of recovery of incriminating material from accused. 54 PW 11 Narinder Singh is the driver of taxi No DL lT 3635 in whose taxi, as per the prosecution, accused Anjum Zamrud had left the Pakistan Embassy and was apprehended near Chanakya Chembry and recovery of Rs. 3 lacs in 30 packs of Rs. 100 denomination which she allegedly collected from Pakistan High Commission for distribution to various terrorists organization, the name of which were found mention in the diary Ex.PW 11/B. He testified that he was driving taxi No.DL lT 3635 and used to park at taxi stand namely Bhupender Singh Atma 85 Tourist opposite PM House on Race Course Road. He further testified that on 6.2.03 a telephone call was received for sending taxi from Pakistan Embassy at about 12.30 pm, it was his turn for taking taxi. He drove his taxi from taxi stand to Pakistan Embassy, where he reached within five minutes and there he met Anjum Zamrud the accused present in Court. He further testified that it was about 12.45 pm accused was carrying one bag and she told him to drop her to Malviya Nagar and while he was taking the accused to Malviya Nagar and was at a distance of about 100 yards from Chankaya Chembry, the van came from behind and stopped his taxi by over taking. From the van one lady police official 86 and 3 /4 more police officials got down and showed their I card to him. The I card shown to him was of Gurcharan Singh who informed him that his taxi was to be searched. Gurcharan Singh searched the bag of the accused and recovered 30 packs of Rs. 100 denomination besides one small bag with the lady, which was searched and found containing one air ticket, two photographs, some cash and his diary. It is further testified that he signed the memo Ex.PW 11/A ie seizure memo of the articles recovered from the possession of accused Anjum Zamrud . He identified the articles recovered from the possession of accused i e black colour bag as Ex.P4, ladies purse as Ex.P5, the currency notes 30 packs 87 of Rs.100/- denomination as Ex.P 6/ 1 to 30 and the diary recovered from the bag carried by accused as Ex.PW7/A. He further proved the air ticket from her possession as Ex.PW 11/B and the remaining documents recovered from the purse carried by the accused as Ex.P7 which were seized vide seizure memo as Ex.PW 11/C. This witness was put to lengthy cross examination by the defence counsel regarding signing of the documents at the spot, the proceedings conducted at the spot, the place where the taxi was stopped by the police and about the surroundings and the manner how he reached Pakistan High Commission. Nothing material could be extracted during his testimony by the defence 88 and the witness answered the questions put to him consistently and coherently. He denied the suggestion of the defence that he had not taken accused Anjum Zamrud from the gate of Pakistan High Commission. He further denied the suggestion that he had deposed falsely against accused Anjum Zamrud at the instance of the police.
55 From the testimony of PW 17 LN Rao ACP it stands proved on record that he had received a secret information about a lady visiting Pakistan High Commission on 6.2.03 to get some money from Pakistan High Commission to be used for funding terrorist organisations in India and his testimony finds corroboration from the statement of PW 20 89 Inspt Parasnath to whom the information was passed and he was asked to take necessary action on the basis of the information. Consequently he formed a raidng party consisting of SI AK Singh, SI CP Singh, WASI Dhara Mishra , HC Quarban Ali, HC Pawan Kumar and Ct,.Mohan alongwith commandos . PW20 Inspt Parasnath, PW12 WASI Dhara Mishra and PW 24 SI CP Singh have been examined as prosecution witnesses who all have categorically deposed about the visit of the accused in a taxi No DL lT 4398 owned by PW 9 Salig Ram Dev and her entering to Pakistan High Commission while holding a black colour small purse in her hand and when she comes out she was found holding a black 90 leather bag on her right shoulder besides small purse in her hand. It has come on record through the testimony of these witnesses that by that time PW 22 Inspt Gurcharan Singh had also joined the raiding party and accused left the Pakistan High Commission in another taxi No DL lT 3635 which was lateron intercepted at Niti Marg by Inspt Gurcharan Singh and the members of the raiding party. Vide the testimony of PW9 Salig Ram it is proved on record that the accused had hired taxi No. DL lT 4398 for Pakistan High Commission from his taxi stand in Malviya Nagar and it is this witness who had brought her to Pakistan Embassy and dropped her there. The suggestion of the 91 defence to the witness that accused never visited the Pakistan High Commission was categorically denied by PW 9 as incorrect. Besides there is nothing on record to suggest that this witness was interested in the success of the case or was enimical towards the accused and could depose falsely to implicate her. All the prosecution witnesses namely WASI Dhara Mishra, Inspt Paras Nath Inspt Gurcharan Singh and Inspt CP Singh categorically stated that the accused had left the Pakistan High Commission alongwith a black colour leather bag which was not in her possession when she had entered the Pakistan High Commission and they all stated unanimously that the accused had left the 92 Pakistan High Commission in Taxi No DL l T 3635 which was driven by PW11 Narinder Singh. PW 11 Narinder Singh testified that he used to park taxi No DL lT 3635 at a taxi stand run under the name and style of "Bhupender Singh Atma Ram Tourist" opposite PM House Race Course Road and on receipt of a call on 6.2.03 for sending a taxi to Pakistan High Commission since it was his turn to take the taxi he drove to Pakistan Embassy where accused Anjum Zamrud present in Court boarded the same. Again the defence has failed to show as to why this witness would depose falsely against the accused when he had nothing against her nor was a stock witness of the police nor was enimical towards 93 the accused.
56 From the testimony of all the above witnesses it is proved on record that the accused had visited Pakistan High Commission in taxi No DL lT 4398 and left in taxi No DL lT 3635. It is also proved through the testimony of these witnesses that accused had gone inside the Pakistan High Commission with a small purse in her hand but when came out she was holding a black leather bag Ex.P4 on her shoulder. Further from the testimony of all these official witnesses, it is proved that a sum of Rs 3 lacs was recovered from the possession of accused in denomination of Rs.100 currency note which were found in the black colour leather bag brought by the 94 accused from inside the Pakistan High Commission. The testimony of official witnesses is also corroborated from an independent witness PW 11 Narinder Singh and her confession Ex.PW 21/B recorded U/s 32 POTA. The accused has taken defence that she did not bring any money from Pakistan High Commission but was carrying a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- with her from Srinagar for obtaining visa to Pakistan and other countries and that she had gone to collect visa form from Pakistan High Commission but was apprehended from the office Hurriyat Conference Malviya Nagar. The accused in answer to question No 7 U/s 313 Cr.PC denied recovery of Rs.3 lac whereas in the 95 last question recorded U/s 313 Cr. PC she claimed that she was possessing Rs.3,50,000/- which shows accused has been taking different stands on different stages. It is pertinent to mention that when the accused was produced by the police in the Special Court for the first time on 07/02/2003, she admitted before my Ld Predecessor that the amount of Rs. 3 lacs was given to her by Pakistan Embassy as Nazrana to be given to Chairman of Hurriyat Conference. The aforesaid admission itself proves that the accused had gone to Pakistan High Commission and had received Rs. 3 lacs from there, as such it does not lie in her mouth to state that she never went to Pakistan High Commission to collect money but had 96 gone there to collect a visa form which has never recovered from her possession. Besides the accused, in her confessional statement Ex.PW 21/B recorded by PW 21 DCP Sh Ujjwal Mishra, U/s 32 POTA , had confessed that on 6/2/03 she had gone to Pakistan High Commission at 11 am in a taxi and received a sum of Rs. 3 lacs in a bag from Jalil Abbas Jilani, Deputy High Commissioner. As such, it stands proved on record that the accused had gone to Pakistan High Commission to collect a sum Rs 3lacs from Jalil Abbas Jilani, Deputy High Commissioner. The argument of the defence counsel that the investigating officer did not join any public witnesses in the raiding party is of no 97 consequence as the testimony of the official witnesses has withstood the test of cross examination by the defence counsel and inspires credence that they are truthful witnesses and no corroboration was required from any independent witness, particularly, when their testimony is corroborated by PW 11 Narender Singh, the taxi driver in whose taxi the accuse was travelling and apprehended, the recovery of Rs. 3 lacs was witnessed by PW 11 Narender Singh and he corroborated the statement of police officials on all the material particulars.
57 The argument of the defence counsel that the investigating office ought have verified from the Reserve Bank of India 98 to whom the currency notes recovered from the possession of the accused were issued is of no consequence, particularly, when all the witnesses have categorically stated that when the accused went inside Pakistan High Commission she was carrying a small purse in her hand when she came out she was holding a black colour leather bag on her shoulder, which on search was found containing Rs. 3 lacs. Besides she admitted this fact before trial court on 7.2.03 when she was first time produced by the police before the Court after her arrest that she had taken Rs. 3 lacs from Pakistan Embassy as Nazrana and thereafter admitted this fact in her confessional statement Ex.PW 21/B before DCP Sh 99 Ujjwal Mishra. Regarding the recovery of diary Ex.PW22/B, the accused has admitted in her statement U/s 313 Cr. PC that the same was recovered from her possession, however she denied that it contained the names of the terrorist organizations and some figure against the name of each such terrorist organizations on pages dated 7th to 10th April Ex.PW 7/A and alleged that she was forced to write some names in the diary on the dictation of the IO on the third day of her police remand and that she was tortured in police custody and her clothes were removed by WASI Dhara Mishra with threat that she would be paraded naked and she wrote in the diary under such threat. The defence counsel has also argued 100 that the statement of the accused U/s. 313 Cr PC finds corroboration from the fact that diary was not sealed by the IO. In my opinion, the aforesaid arguments has no force as PW 12 ACP LN Rao has given he reason for not sealing the diary as he categorically stated that the diary was kept unsealed for further investigation and interrogation. The evidence led by the prosecution shows that the relevant entries Ex.PW 7/A in the diary Ex.PW 22/B were sent to CFSL from handwriting experts opinion alongwith admitted writing of the accused, as such the IO has given cogent explanation for not sealing the diary at the spot. Besides it is pertinent to mention that in the rukka Ex,PW 22/A it is mentioned that in 101 the personal diary of the accused on the page dates 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th April as per the instructions received by her she had mentioned some of the terrorist outfits and also wrote the amount to be delivered amongst the militant outfits. Similarly in the seizure memo Ex.PW 11/C the names of all the terrorist organizations and the relevant figures against each name find mention therein. So it cannot be said that the accused was forced to write the names of the terrorist organizations and the figures on the third day of her police custody remand. It is further pertinent to mention that accused did not make any such complaint to the Court at the earliest opportunity available to her. The argument 102 of the defence counsel that she was scared of being paraded naked of no consequence as the accused is a highly qualified lady who is MA, M.Ed and LLB, as such she was aware of the fact that it is only the Court who could redress her grievances and was in safer hand to complain against the police high handedness when she appeared before the Court. Being a lawyer she was well aware of that if police was acting illegally it is the Court who could help her but still she claims that she was under fear of being paraded naked which is a false plea taken by her. Her said conduct is visible from her letter dtd. 19/02/03 addressed to the Court wherein even she denied use of word "Nazrana" before the Court 103 on 7/2/03, as such she leveled allegation against the Court that the word "Nazrana" was recorded wrongly in the order dtd. 7.2.03. It is pertinent to mention that in the order dtd. 7.2.03 it is observed by Ld Predecessor that accused had admitted that she had received Rs. 3 lacs from Pakistan Embassy which she retracted vide her application dtd. 19/2/03, which reflects her malafide. It appears from the record that once the specimen writing was taken to compare it with he relevant pages of the diary, wherein the names of the terrorist organizations were mentioned, the accused concocted the story that she was forced to write these names by the police, as she was aware of that her 104 writing in the diary would tally with her specimen writing and she would not be able to protect herself. The record shows that she was sent to J/C on 14.2.03 and even on that day when she appeared before the Court she did not inform the Court that she was forced to write Ex.PW 7/A in her diary Ex.PW 22/B under threat from the police, though she was aware of that she was no more to remain in police custody and was being sent to J/C, as such her letter dtd. 19.2.03 to the Court is after thought, wherein she alleged that she was forced to write the names of the terrorist organizations in her personal diary and that she did not use word "Nazrana " before the Court.
10558 The other argument of the defence counsel that rukka was prepared by ACP LN Rao initially was destroyed and lateron another rukka was prepared by Inspt Gurcharan Singh is of no consequence. The defence counsel has relied upon the testimony of PW 20 Inspt. Parasnath, who testified that rukka was prepared by ACP LN Rao but during cross examination when rukka was shown to him he sated that it was in the handwriting of Inspt Gurcharan Singh. Perusal of the cross examination of PW 20 Inspt Parasnath shows that he was not sure as to who had prepared the rukka, whether it was written by ACP LN Rao or by Inspt Gurcharan Singh and finally when he saw the 106 rukka he stated that it was in the handwriting of Inspt Gurcharan Singh. Perusal of the record further shows that the incident is dtd. 6.2.2003, whereas the statement of Inspt Parasnath was recorded on 12.01.2007. As such there is every possibility that the witness could not recollect as to who had prepared the rukka at the spot on the relevant day, particularly, when all the other witnesses have categorically stated that the rukka was prepared by Inspt Gurcharan Singh and denied the suggestion that it was prepared by ACP LN Rao.
50 The defence counsel has further argued that the confessional statement Ex.PW 21/B cannot be relied upon as the provisions 107 of Section 32 Sub. Sec (2), Section 32 Sub Section (3),Section 32 Sub Sec. (4) and Section 32 Sub Section (5) POTA were not complied with while recording her confessional statement.
60 As per the provisions of Section 32 (2) POTA, "A police officer shall, before recording any confession made by a person under Sub-section (1) explain to such person in writing that he is not bound to make a confession and that if he does so, it may be used against him.'' 61 Further as per Section 32(3) POTA , " The confession shall be recorded in an atmosphere free from threat or inducement and shall be in the same language in which the 108 person makes it. "
62 As per Section 32(4) POTA, " The person from whom a confession has been recorded under Section (1), shall be produced before the Court of a Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or the Court of a Chief Judicial Magistrate alongwith the original statement of confession, written or recorded on mechanical or electronic device within forty-eight hours." 63 As per Section 32(5) POTA, "the chief Metropolitan Magistrate or the Chief Judicial Magistrate shall, record the statement, if any, made by the person so produced and get his signature or thumb-impression and if there is any complaint of torture, such person shall be directed to be produced for medical 109 examination and thereafter shall be sent to the judicial custody."
64 The defence counsel has argued that in the present case the accused was not informed in writing in compliance of the provisions of Section 32(2 POTA that she was not bound to make any confession and that if she makes any such confession it may be used against her.
65 PW 21 Sh. Ujjwal Mishra , the ( then) DCP who recorded the confession ExPW21/B of the accused testified that on 11.2.03 he was posted as DCP Spl Branch and on that day ACP L N Rao and WASI Dhara Mishra produced accused Anjum Zamrud before him for recording her confessional 110 statement and moved an application Mark A on the ground that she wanted to make confession voluntarily. She was produced before him at about 4.30 pm and he asked ACP LN Rao and WASI Dhara Mishra to leave the room and only the accused was left in his room alongwith SI Vinod Kumar who was operating Hindi computer. It is testified that he gave warning to the accused that her confessional statement would be used against her and also gave her time for 48 hours to think over her decision. Thereafter she was directed to be produced before him on 13.2.03. He stated that the proceedings were recorded in Hindi which are ExPW21/A bearing signature of accused at point A and 111 of the witness at point B. 66 He further stated that on 13.2.03 accused was produced before him around 5pm in his office by ACP LN Rao and WASI Dhara Mishra. On that day, again she was questioned whether she was making statement voluntarily and she stated that she would give her statement voluntarily without any fear, pressure or coercion. On that day also she was informed that her confessional statement could be used against her in the Court. It is stated that the confessional statement of accused was recorded by SI Vinod Kumar under the direction of the witness, wherein she stated that she was resident of Anant Nag J & K, was post graduate degree holder and had 112 began her career as a Field Agent of Khadi Gram Udyog and lateron she came under the influence of Yasin Malik and later she met Professor Abdul Ghani Butt of the All Party Hurriyat Conference. She promised to become a full time worker for the liberation of Kashmir. She was asked by APHC to go to Delhi and she reached by plane on 5.2.03 and stayed at the office of Kashmir Awareness Bureau at Malviya Nagar. On 6.2.03 she went to the Pakistan High Commission to meet Mr Jelani. She met him and collected a sum of Rs. 3 lacs and while she was returning in a taxi, she was apprehended by the Spl Cell Team who recovered the entire amount from her. He proved the confessional statement of the 113 accused as Ex PW 21/B bearing her signature at point A. He further stated that the confessional statement was read over and explained her before she signed the same. The witness proved his signature on the confessional statement at point B. He further proved the application moved by ACP LN Rao Ex.PW 21/C for supply of the photo copy of the confessional statement of the accused. He further testified that both the applications Ex PW 21/C and Mark A moved by the IO and the entire proceedings were put in an envelope and sealed with the seal of Spl Branch Delhi Police and were sent to Sh VK Maheshwari the then ACMM New Delhi. He proved the envelope as ExPW 21/G in which the 114 confessional statement of the accused was sent to the then Ld ACMM for confirmation. 67 During cross examination the witness stated that when she appeared before him she spoke in reasonably fluent Urdu /Hindi language . He further deposed that since the accused happened to be a double MA and LLB it implied knowledge of various languages . He stated that since accused spoke to him in Hindi so he presumed she was knowing Hindi. He further testified during cross examination that he was deputed by Joint Commissioner police Spl Cell to record the confessional statement of the accused .
68 The perusal of proceedings Ex.PW21/A conducted by DCP Sh Ujjwal 115 Mishra shows that he had informed the accused that she was not bound to make confession as if she would make any such confession it could be use against her during trial and she was further informed that the confession has to be without any pressure, threat or inducement. It further shows that after giving such warning to the accused she was given 48 hours to re-think whether she still wanted to make confession. These proceedings took place on 11.2.03 which was signed by the accused and she was again produced before DCP Sh. Ujjwal Mishra on 13.2.03 when she was again warned that her such statement / confession could be used against her during trial and after this warning 116 her confession was recorded. As such in my opinion there was no such violation of provisions of order 32 Sub Sec. 2 by DCP Sh Ujjwal Mishra.
69 The argument of the defence counsel that the accused made confession under threat from the police of being paraded naked and that it was also not recorded in the language known to her is again of no consequence as, as observed above the accused had appeared before Sh VK Maheshwari, the ( then) ACMM New Delhi for confirmation of the confession where she could inform the Judge that the confession was made by her under pressure and threat from the police that she will be paraded naked and 117 that it was not recorded in her language so she was not aware of the contents of the same. However, she did not complain to the Judge despite the fact she herself is a law graduate and knew that it is theJudge who could appreciate her said complaint and redress her grievance. The accused did not retract before Sh VK Maheshwari the (then) ACMM who is examined as PW 13. He testified that an application Ex.PW13/A was moved by ACP Sh. LN Rao before him who also produced statement made by the accused before DCP in a sealed cover. He testified that he recorded the statement of accused Anjum Zamrud after ensuring all the precautions as taken by the witness while recording the proceedings 118 relating to co-accused Shabir Ahmed Dar such like observing secrecy while conducting proceedings and explaining the accused that she was not bound to make such statement before the police and also explained the consequences of making such statement and he enquired from her whether such statement was made by her before DCP voluntarily or whether she was subjected to any torture for extorting the confession and thereafter the accused made statement Ex.PW13/E which is recorded in Hindi wherein she stated before the ACMM New Delhi that she was MA M.Ed and LLB and was aware of her rights. That she was impressed with the views of Kashmir Liberation so she decided to work for the same 119 and had relations with KAB and APHC that she was also on visiting terms to Pakistan High Commission from where she had brought money. She further stated that on 11.2.03 and 13.2.03 she was produced before DCP where she had made statement of her free will without any pressure which she had again gone through before Ld ACMM and identified her signatures. She also specifically stated that she had no complaint against any police officer. It is important to note that at the foot of her said statement she wrote in English language i e " I am signing my statement today before this Court after reading and understanding.'' The argument of the defence counsel that the accused was not acquitant 120 with Hindi language is falsified by her said endorsement EX.PW 13/F on statement ExPW13/E wherein it is written in her own handwriting that she signed her statement before the Court after reading and writing as referred above as her said statement was recorded in Hindi by the Ld. ACMM. The statement Ex.PW 13/E with endorsement ExPW13/F made by the accused before the Ld ACMM further strengthens the case of the prosecution that the accused was neither harassed nor tortured to make confession before DCP as there is not an iota of allegation against the police officers that she was forced to make the confession under threat that she would be paraded naked. 121 70 So the argument of the defence counsel that accused was not aware of Hindi language is falsified by her endorsement ExPW13/F on her statement Ex.pW13/E recorded in Hindi by the Ld. ACMM. It is pertinent to mention that throughout the present proceedings the accused conversed with the Court in Hindi Language. 71 The argument of the defence counsel that the clothes of the accused was removed several times by WASI Dhara Mishra finds no support from the material on record. Nodoubt, admittedly her clothes were removed once by WASI Dhara Mishra when her body inspection was carried out to find out that she was not concealing any incriminating article 122 and that was the part of the investigation. 72 It is further pertinent to mention that on 14.2.03 she was produced before ACMM for confirmation of her statement recorded U/s 32 POTA and on the same day she was sent to J/C as such the provisions of Section 32(5) POTA were duly complied with . The argument of the defence counsel that she was produced in police custody before ACMM and after her statement before ACMM she was again sent to police custody is of no consequence considering the fact that the accused is a highly qualified lady and is well aware of her rights and also knew that it is the Court who could help her out of the situation but still she chose to remain quiet and did not 123 complain against the police officers which only leads to the inference that she was never put under any pressure nor she was threatened by the police to be paraded naked if she did not make confession. It is further important to note that after the proceedings were over before Ld ACMM she was produced in the Spl Court from where she was sent to J/C even at that time she did not complaint against any of the erring police officials nor retracted from her confession. The letter dtd.19.2.03 was sent to this Court from jail by the accused whereby for the first time she alleged that she was pressurised to make a statement and was forced to sign blank papers and write down the names of some militant organisations in 124 her pocket/personal diary which is an after thought effort by the accused to retract from her confession ExPW21/B and to derive the Court towards disbelieving the contents of the diary ExPW22/B containing the names of terrorist organisations on the pages Ex.PW7/A whereby the details of the amount to be distributed to the terrorist organisations also finds mention. However, the accused has failed to convince the court by such an attempt. I find there is nothing on record to suggest that her confession Ex.PW21/B recorded U/s 32 POTA was made by the accused under any pressure or threat from the police officers.
73 The other argument of the 125 defence counsel that it is only the CMM Delhi who could confirm the confession recorded U/s 32 of POTA is also of no consequence as the practice followed in Delhi Courts is based on area wise jurisdiction ie in case the accused is arrested from North Delhi or Central Delhi he or she is to be produced for confirmation of her statement recorded U/s 32 POTA before CMM Delhi, whereas in other cases he or she is to be produced before the concerned ACMM Delhi / New Delhi.
74 The other argument of the defence counsel that the accused was not given any right under Section 52 POTA to consult a legal practitioner is again of no consequence as ACP LN Rao the IO of the case has 126 categorically stated during cross examination that he had verbally told the accused that she had right to legal consultation and this fact was mentioned in the case diary. As per the provisions of Section 52 (2) POTA the person arrested shall be informed of his right to consult a legal practitioner as soon as he is brought to the PS. Though it is always appreciable that such information must be given in writing to the arrested person, however Sec. 52(2) POTA does not make it mandatory that such information shall be given in writing. It is pertinent to note that accused herself is a law graduate and is well aware of her legal rights. PW17 SCP Sh.LN Rao has categorically stated that accused told him that 127 she would argue her case personally which is quite natural since she is a qualified lawyer as per her own admission. Even PW12 WASI Dhara Mishra stated during cross examination that accused was informed that she had right to consult legal practitioner and accused was also allowed to make a call to someone at Srinagar , which shows that the accused was not kept under any pressure or threat, otherwise she would not have been allowed to make call to any person in Srinagar from the PS. Thus I find no force in the argument of the defence counsel that accused was not made aware of her right to legal consultation. 75 The other argument of the defence counsel that all party Hurriyat 128 Conference is not a terrorist organisation U/s 18(a) and 18(b) POTA, therefore even if the alleged money which was recovered from the accused was for APHC it would in no manner constitute an offence under POTA. It is submitted that accused neither has any connection with terrorist organisations nor prosecution has established any such link. Once again the confessional statement made by the accused which in my opinion was made voluntarily and without any pressure and which is admissible against the accused under Section 32(1) POTA, wherein she has confessed that she had received a sum of Rs. 3 lacs in a bag from Jalil Abbas Jilani, Dy High Commissioner Pakistan High Commission 129 which has to deliver to Jehadi Organisation through APHC proves that though APHC by itself is not a terrorist organisation as per Sec. 18(a) and 18(b) POTA but the funds collected by her from Pakistan High Commission were to be delivered to the terrorist organisations through APHC. Besides recovery of diary ExPW22/A containing the names of terrorist organisations with some numerical figures against the name of each such organisation on page Ex.PW7/A also proves her links with the terrorists. The purpose of her receiving money from Pakistan High Commission was to fund the terrorist organisations through APHC which is an offence U/s 22(2) POTA. 76 The prosecution has proved on 130 record vide testimony of PW 14 Sh GL Meena, Dy Secretary ( Home) Government of NCT the sanction Ex.PW14/A U/s. 50 POTA for the prosecution of the accused under the provisions of POTA on the basis of the material produced before then LG who accorded sanction which was conveyed by PW 14 Sh. GL Meena on 20.5.03.
77 The defence counsel further argued that the provisions of Section 7 POTA were not complied with in the present case as no prior approval was sought in writing from DGP / Officer of the equal rank in Delhi for seizing the proceeds of terrorism and further that in view of provisions of Sec. 7 the investigation of the case where the proceeds of 131 terrorism are to be seized is to be investigated by an officer of the rank of DCP and not ACP as happened in the present case. However, I do not agree with the aforesaid contention of the defence counsel as the provisions of Sec. 7 POTA are not attracted to the facts and circumstances of the present case since the amount recovered from the possession of the accused cannot be termed as proceeds of terrorism as mentioned in Sec. 7 POTA but it was an amount collected by the accused from Jalil Abbas Jilani, Dy Commissioner from Pakistan High Commission for distribution to banned terrorist organisations, In fact the accused had raised funds from Pakistan High Commission with an intention to deliver the 132 same to the terrorist organisations and the purpose of the use of these funds is obviously terrorism Thus in the present case the provisions of Sec. 7 POTA are not applicable and the investigation was rightly carried out by an officer of the rank of ACP and it did not require any prior approval from Director General of Police /an officer of equal rank in Delhi.
78 From the above discussion, I am satisfied that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused, who was working for liberation of Kasmir, had collected a sum of Rs 3 lacs from Pakistan High Commission to distribute to different banned terrorist organisations and therefore 133 she committed an offence punishable U/s. 22 (2) POTA. Hence she is convicted U/s 22(2) POTA.
79 The accused was also charged punishable U/s 22(3) POTA. To attract the provisions of Section 22(3) POTA it was the duty the prosecution to prove on record that the accused provided money or any other property knowing or having reasonable cause to suspect that it will or may be used for the purpose of terrorism. However, the prosecution has failed to produce any evidence on record against the accused to attract the provisions of Section 22(3) POTA. Hence the accused is acquitted under said charge. 80 The case property i e a sum of Rs.3 134 lacs stands forfeited to the State Government.
Now to come up for arguments on the point of sentence on 28/09/2007.
ANNOUNCED IN (RAVINDER KAUR)
OPEN COURT ASJ/NEW DELHI
TODAY
DATED: 24/09/2007
135
IN THE COURT OF MS RAVINDER KAUR, ASJ, NEW DELHI.
SC No.22/03
STATE VS. ANJUM ZAMRUD
D/o Sh Habibullah
Bhatt
R/o H No 830,
Mohallah Mehman
Rishi Bazar, Anant Nag,
Jammu & Kashmir.
FIR No.09/03
PS Special Cell
U/s. 22(2) POTA
ORDER ON SENTENCE
Pr. Spl. PP for State.
Accused in custody with Sh. VK
Ohri,advocate.
I have heard arguments on the point of sentence.
The counsel for accused Anjum Zamrud Bakshi has submitted that accused is 46 years of age and is in custody since 06/02/2003. It is further 136 submitted that she is a government servant and had attended the office till December 2002 and was never involved in any other criminal activity. It is prayed that lenient view be taken while awarding sentence.
On the other hand Spl. PP has submitted that the accused deserves no leniency in view of the nature of the offence.
Considering the gravity of the offence proved against her, I sentence the accused to undergo RI for 5 years U/s 22(2) POTA. Benefit of Sec. 428 Cr.PC be given to the accused person.
Announced in Open Court (Ravinder Kaur) Date: 28/9/07 ASJ : N. Delhi 137 SC No 22/03 28/9/07 Present: Ms. Anita Hooda, Spl PP for State. Accused in custody with Sh VK Ohri, adv.
Vide separate sheet, the order on sentence is announced.
File be consigned to the Record Room.
ASJ/ND.28.9.07 138 139 State Vs Anjum Zamrud 24.09.2007 Present: Ms. Anita Hooda, Spl PP for State.
Accused in custody with Sh VK Ohri, adv.
Vide separate judgment,accused is convicted for the offence punishable U/s 22(2) POTA and acquitted for the offence punishable U/s 22(3) POTA .
Now to come up for arguments on the point of sentence on 28/9/07 at 2PM .
ASJ/ND/24.9.07 140 SC No. 22/03 31.8.07 Pr Ms. Anita Hooda, Spl.PP for State.
Accused in custody with advocate Sh.Akshay Malik.
Order partly dictated.
141Some clarifications are required from the prosecution. As such, put up for clarifications on 19.9.07.
ASJ/ND/31.8.07